From the article, you learned about the difficulties (competition, politics, corruption, greed, pursuing of own interests, education, etc) that scientists face in trying to collaborate with each other to obtain the most accurate results. It has been established that the collaboration must be done for future SNP research. Then, how do you think these difficulties can be overcome and will there be further ramifications? VIDEO FROM THE SEMINAR
As discussed in class, the only way
for scientists to strongly and effectively conquer SNPs is by collaboratively
working together. However, it is in our human nature to be selfish and competitive
therefore, inhibiting scientists to making scientific discoveries quicker. As a
result, scientists need to set aside their competitive differences for the
common good of science.
First off, the information collected
and discovered should be shared among the scientific community so others can
provide and aid in the SNP research. This allows for smarter and efficient
research instead of having individual groups doing the same experiment over and
over again. Furthermore, the human genome is extremely complex and lengthy. As Kevin
said, if a person were to type 100 letters per minute, it would still take 50
years for that individual to completely type out the human genome. In this
sense, how can you expect one group to label SNPs when the genome is
complicated and extremely long? Therefore, if scientists work on an
international level, this large work load can be distributed and SNPs can be
quickly found.
An example of SNP collaboration in an
international sense was shown in the video. There is a large establishment that
studies SNPs among Australia, UK, United States and New Zealand. These SNP
chips, created with the aid of 19 countries, is a genetic tool that enables
scientist to track SNPs. These SNP ships will be placed in the sheep genome to
track genetic variations. The reason this establishment is functioning so well is
because many people have decided to put their competitive differences aside and
work for the common good of science.
Another topic that was spoken in class
was whether or not having the ability of knowing your SNP list is a positive or
negative. According to me, this SNP list is a “double edged sword” in which it
can provide both positive and negative attributes. The positives are the fact
that you have the knowledge of your SNPs; you can prepare for the future,
whether preparing for an illness or an illness-free life and can lead to future
medicine by analyzing the SNP. The negatives are the knowledge of a life-threatening
illness such as cancer or psychopathic behavior; being discriminating for
having an illness or medical centers causing fear to uneducated patients. To
me, I believe that knowing your SNP list would cause more positivity than
negativity as a person can prepare for the future and it is something that they
should know about, it is information that makes us, us.
On the contrary, the revealing of the
SNP list is something that an individual has the right to do or not. They should
not be pressured or feel obligated to because the SNP list is something private.
So it begs the question, what if employers or insurance companies want to know your
SNP information to ensure their company will be okay. I believe that the BEST negotiation
between privacy and publicly with private and personal SNP information is
providing a small list of the most life threatening illness or disease that
people may not desire such as having a 99% chance of having psychopathic behavior
To ensure a promising future for SNP
research, scientists must work together to achieve this goal and set aside
competitive motions. As for the ability to attain other people’s SNP
information, it ultimately is an individual’s choice to tell unless there is a
check-mark for a highly negative SNP on a negative SNP list that the government
and health system can provide.
No comments:
Post a Comment